INTERPRETATIVE
PURPOSE OF IPA
• Investigate how individuals make sense of their experiences
• Produce an in-depth examination of certain phenomena, not generate a theory to be generalized over the whole population
• Elicit rich, detailed, and first-person accounts of experiences and phenomena under investigation
• Say something in detail about the perception and
understandings of this particular group rather than prematurely make more general claim
PRINCIPLES OF IPA
PHENOMENOLOGY
• Concerned with attending to the way things appear to individuals in experience
• Identify the essential components of phenomena or
experiences which make them unique or distinguishable from other
• Try to recognize what essential components make a given phenomenon special (or unique) by using eidetic reduction
HERMENEUTICS
• Double hermeneutic – a two-stage (dual) interpretation process
1. Participants make meaning of their world
2. The researcher tries to decode that meaning – make sense of the participants’ meaning making
• Try to understand what an experience is like from the participant’s perspective
IDIOGRAPHY
• Refer to an in-depth analysis of single cases and examining individual perspectives of study participants in their unique contexts
• Explore every single case before producing any general statements
• Focus on the particular rather the universal
• Study a group of individuals and move between important themes generated in the analysis and exemplify them with
FORMULATING
RESEARCH
QUESTIONS
• Usually framed broadly and openly
• No attempt to test a predetermined hypothesis of the researcher
• Attempt to explore, flexibly and in detail, an area of concern
• Usually start with: How and What
SAMPLING IN IPA
• Small samples – enable a detailed and very time consuming case-by-case analysis
• Fairly homogenous sample. Degree of homogenous depends on:
• Interpretative concerns • Pragmatic considerations
• Purposively selected participants
• Sample may include individual with similar demographic or socio-economic status profile
• Number of participants: No rule, depending on:
1. The depth of analysis of a single case study
2. The richness of the individual cases
3. How the researcher wants to compare or contrast single cases
COLLECTING DATA
• Via semi-structured, in-depth, one-on-one interview
• Semi-structured interviews – PROS:
• Allow the researcher and the participant to engage in a dialogue in real time
SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW
• A set of questions on an interview schedule but the interview will be guided by the schedule rather than be dictated by it
• Features of semi-structured interview:
• There is an attempt to establish rapport with the respondent • The ordering of questions is less important
ADVANTAGES
• Facilitates rapport/empathy
• Allow a greater flexibility of coverage
• Allow the interview to go into novel areas
• Produce richer data
• Reduce control over the situation
• Take longer to carry out
• Be harder to analyze
DISADVANTAGES
CONSTRUCTING INTERVIEW
QUESTIONS
1. Start with the most general possible question
2. Include questions and answers at both general and more specific levels
3. Use funnelling technique
CONSTRUCTING INTERVIEW
QUESTIONS
TIPS:
1. Questions should be neutral rather than value-laden or leading
2. Avoid jargon or assumptions of technical proficiency. Try to think of the perspective and language of the participants in your study and frame your questions in a way they will feel familiar and comfortable with
3. Use open, note closed, questions
CONDUCTING SEMI-STRUCTURED
INTERVIEW
• Last for a considerable amount of time (an hour or more)
• Become intense and involved
• Try to make sure that the interview can proceed without interruption
• Better to conduct the interview with the respondent alone
CONDUCTING SEMI-STRUCTURED
INTERVIEW
TIPS:
1. Try not to rush in too quickly
2. Use minimal probes
3. Ask one question at a time
ANALYSIS
Looking for themes in the
first case
1
Connecting themes
2
Continuing the analysis
with other cases
LOOKING FOR THEMES IN THE FIRST
CASE
• Close reading of the transcript a number of times
• Listen to audio recording a few times
• Focus on content, language use, context, and initial interpretative comments
• Highlight distinctive phrases and emotional responses Help to immerse the researcher in the data, recall the
CONNECTING THEMES
• List the emergent themes on a sheet of paper
• Look for connections between emergent themes
• Order in chronological setting
• Make sense of the connections between emerging themes
• Cluster the themes together
• Check in the transcript to make sure the connections work for the primary source material – the actual words of the participant
CONTINUING THE ANALYSIS WITH
OTHER CASES
• Move on to incorporate interviews with a number of different individuals
• Either use the themes from the first case to help orient the subsequent analysis or put the table of themes for participant 1 aside and work on transcript 2 from scratch
• Need to be disciplined to discern repeating patterns but also acknowledge new issues emerging as working through the transcripts
• Respect convergences and divergences in the data –
WRITING UP
• Translating the themes into a narrative account
• The analysis becomes expansive again, as the themes are explained, illustrated and
nuanced
• The table of themes is the basis for the
account of the participants’ responses, which takes the form of the narrative argument
interspersed with verbatim extracts from the transcripts to support the case
• The narrative account may engage several levels of interpretation, from low-level
interpretation of data to a highly detailed, interpretative and theoretical level, which may generate new insights
